Exhortation to Philosophy (Protrepticus)

would be found only in Platonic passages or in the fragments of Pseudo-Archytas1.

Whatever I have passed over in silence, lest I burden the annotation with a medley of readings that are not sufficiently probable, and likewise the observations and emendations which H. Vitelli communicated to me while this book was being printed, in short, everything which seemed to require retraction, I shall now cast into

Addenda and Corrigenda.

P. 7, 2 ‘The words πάσας δὲ παιδείας all education—if our author’s diligence in writing were greater, I would judge them to be deleted’ K || p. 10, 5 read τὰ μικρὰ the small things || p. 14, 11 concerning the word ἐπεισοδιώδη episodic (Hemsterhusius and Christ. Godofr. Müller had attained this by conjecture) cf. Iambl. ap. Stob. Ecl. II 8, 4 (v. II p. 175, 4 Wachsm.). Friedlein, Index to Procl. in Euclid. s. v. Busse preface to Porphyr. Isag. p. VII. K had written ἐπουσιώδη superficial/inessential based on Scaliger’s conjecture (ἐπεισιώδη Laur. 86, 29 and A) || p. 15, 18 and 16, 3 ‘I regret now the futile conjecture by which I tampered with the words φύσεων natures and φύσιν nature in Crotone.’ Vitelli || p. 16, 20 πράγμασιν in things] in all human things, and N. Scutellius translates (de secta Pyth. p. 28); he, as it seems, used a codex not to be despised and excerpted certain things from the Protrepticus in Latin in the book which is titled ‘Iambl. de Myster. Aegypt. etc. Nicolao Scutellio interpre. Adiecti de vita et secta Pythagorae Flosculi, ab eodem Scutellio ex ipso Iamblicho collecti’ (Rome, 1556) || p. 18, 27 the words καὶ ἐπεσημήνατο and he noted, even if suspicious because of the common form, Iambl. does not disregard them in the explanation p. 19, 18 sq. || p. 19, 7 ‘Schneider in his lexicon

1) The fragments which are brought forward (pp. 16—24) from the book Περὶ σοφίας On Wisdom should hardly be ascribed to Archytas the Tarentine philosopher. If anyone should think otherwise, he may, as far as I am concerned, restore the Doric dialect as Blass believes it should be restored for Archytas in Mélanges Graux p. 573 sqq. I, on the contrary, have patiently tolerated many vulgar forms, but it is clear that not even a masked Archytas could have written now ἐντί is (Doric) and now ἐστί is (Attic).